Can a Professor of Intercultural Communication Be Taken Seriously if They Include a NLP Certificate in Their CV?

When a professor in intercultural communication lists a neurolinguistic programming (NLP) certificate on their CV, it is essential to understand the motivations and the impact of such an inclusion. Many professionals in the field have indeed reported positive effects of NLP in their teaching, and some have even pursued formal training in NLP. This article aims to explore whether such a certificate can be taken seriously and the logical fallacies behind questioning it.

Reliability of Reported Experiences

One of the primary reasons to take NLP seriously in a CV is the authenticity and reliability of the reported experiences. If a professor's NLP teacher has worked successfully as a consultant in school development, it provides a clear indicator of the practical value of NLP. However, it is also true that a professor should have listed other relevant qualifications beyond an NLP course to secure a position. Even then, including NLP does not diminish their credibility entirely.

Professionals in intercultural communication often use a variety of tools and techniques to enhance their teaching. NLP is one such tool that can significantly enrich the learning experience if applied correctly. It is reasonable to question whether NLP alone could be sufficient to run an intercultural communication class successfully, but the answer lies in the broader context of the overall knowledge and experience of the professor. NLP can certainly enhance the quality of lessons but may not be the sole determining factor.

Understanding Logical Fallacies

The question about the seriousness of a professor listing NLP in their CV can be analyzed in terms of logical fallacies:

Loaded Question

The question itself is loaded with assumptions about NLP and its relevance in intercultural communication. It presumes that NLP is either sufficient or irrelevant without allowing for complex and nuanced discussions. Any claim about the value of NLP should be evaluated on its merit rather than being dismissed outright.

False Cause

The question also commits the logical fallacy of false cause, where a relationship is mistakenly assumed between taking an NLP course and being a qualified intercultural communication professor. Simply attending an NLP course does not automatically make one a capable teacher in intercultural communication. A broader assessment of teaching skills, research background, and pedagogical experience is necessary.

Universities and Professional Judgements

Universities have mechanisms in place to ensure that professors meet stringent criteria for their roles. Review committees assess not only the curriculum vitae but also the overall qualifications, research contributions, and teaching evaluations. It is the responsibility of these committees, rather than individual members of the public, to evaluate the competence of a professor adequately.

Additionally, it is crucial to recognize that generalizing judgments based on a single CV entry is unfair. It disregards the individual differences and unique contributions that each professor brings to their field. Questioning a professor's credibility based on a single NLP certificate is akin to judging all mathematicians based on their inclusion of calculus on their CV.

Personal Motivations and Research

Professors often take NLP courses out of personal interest or to integrate research into their teaching methods. The inclusion of such a certificate can indicate a commitment to holistic learning and effective communication strategies. It raises the question: Why should a professor not mention their NLP training if it reflects a genuine interest in enhancing their pedagogical skills?

Some may argue that merely participating in an NLP course is not enough to qualify a professor. However, this argument overlooks the potential benefits and positive impacts that NLP can have. If a professor uses NLP effectively in their classes, it should be celebrated rather than questioned. Dismissing a course because it might not cover every aspect of intercultural communication is a narrow view.

Conclusion

Instead of generalizing or passing judgment on a professor based on a single CV entry, it is more productive to focus on their overall qualifications, research, and teaching methods. Adopting a broader and more inclusive perspective can foster a better understanding of the diverse skills and experiences that contribute to effective intercultural communication teaching.

By recognizing the value of NLP and other pedagogical tools, we can enhance the quality of our educational practices. Educating ourselves on the diverse methodologies available can lead to more informed and effective teaching strategies. Therefore, a professor should be taken seriously if they include an NLP certificate in their CV, as long as it is part of a broader and more comprehensive set of qualifications and experiences.